State v. Bitler

2023 Ohio 4337

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: November 30, 2023
• Docket: CT2023-0034
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as State v. Bitler, 2023-Ohio-4337.]

COURT OF APPEALS MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

STATE OF OHIO JUDGES: Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee Hon. William B. Hoffman, J. Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J. -vs- Case No. CT2023-0034 BRUTIS J. BITLER

Defendant-Appellant OPINION

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: Appeal from the Muskingum County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. CR2022- 0696

JUDGMENT: Affirmed

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: November 30, 2023

APPEARANCES:

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant

RON WELCH, ESQ. CHRIS BRIGDON Prosecuting Attorney 8138 Somerset Road Muskingum County, Ohio Thornville, Ohio 43076 27 North Fifth Street P.O. Box 189 Zanesville, Ohio 43702 Muskingum County, Case No. CT2023-034 2

Hoffman, J. {¶1} Defendant-appellant Brutis J. Bitler appeals the judgment entered by the

Muskingum County Common Pleas Court convicting him following his pleas of guilty to

aggravated possession of drugs (R.C. 2925.11(A)) and illegal use or possession of drug

paraphernalia (R.C. 2925.14(C)(1)), and sentencing him to an aggregate term of

incarceration of four to six years. Plaintiff-appellee is the state of Ohio.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE

{¶2} On September 17, 2022, police officers found a car in the parking lot of the

Econo Lodge in Zanesville, Ohio, which was registered to Michelle Barr. Officers had a

warrant for Barr’s arrest. After speaking to staff at the motel, officers learned Barr had

rented Room 106.

{¶3} Officers knocked on the door of Room 106. Barr answered the door.

Officers informed her she was under arrest, and she went back inside the room. Officers

followed Barr inside the room to arrest her.

{¶4} Appellant was also in the motel room. Officers saw in plain view burnt foil,

smoking pipes, plastic baggies, a digital scale, and a cigarette pack with a baggie hanging

out of it containing a crystal substance. The substance was tested and found to be

methamphetamine with a weight of over 15 grams.

{¶5} Police interviewed Appellant. Appellant stated he was with Barr, and they

had purchased a couple of ounces of methamphetamine the night before, in order to have

enough before traveling to Florida.

{¶6} Appellant was indicted by the Muskingum County Grand Jury with

aggravated trafficking in drugs, aggravated possession of drugs, and illegal use or

possession of drug paraphernalia. Appellant entered a plea of guilty to aggravated Muskingum County, Case No. CT2023-034 3

possession of drugs and illegal use or possession of drug paraphernalia. The State

dismissed the charge of aggravated trafficking in drugs. The trial court sentenced

Appellant to a term of incarceration of four to six years for aggravated possession of drugs

and 30 days incarceration for illegal use or possession of drug paraphernalia, to be served

concurrently, for an aggregate term of incarceration of four to six years. It is from the

April 19, 2023 judgment of the trial court Appellant prosecutes his appeal.

{¶7} Appellate counsel for Appellant has filed a Motion to Withdraw and a brief

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), rehearing den., 388 U.S. 924,

indicating the within appeal is wholly frivolous. Counsel for Appellant has not raised any

potential assignments of error. Counsel states he “has carefully examined the facts and

matters contained in the record on appeal and has researched the law in connection

therewith and has concluded that the appeal does not present a nonfrivolous legal

question.”

{¶8} In Anders, the United States Supreme Court held if, after a conscientious

examination of the record, a defendant's counsel concludes the case is wholly frivolous,

then he or she should so advise the court and request permission to withdraw. Id. at 744.

Counsel must accompany the request with a brief identifying anything in the record which

could arguably support the appeal. Id. Counsel also must: (1) furnish the client with a

copy of the brief and request to withdraw; and, (2) allow the client sufficient time to raise

any matters the client chooses. Id. Once the defendant's counsel satisfies these

requirements, the appellate court must fully examine the proceedings below to determine

if any arguably meritorious issues exist. If the appellate court also determines the appeal

is wholly frivolous, it may grant counsel's request to withdraw and dismiss the appeal Muskingum County, Case No. CT2023-034 4

without violating constitutional requirements, or may proceed to a decision on the merits

if state law so requires. Id.

{¶9} Appellant has not filed a pro se brief, and the State has not filed a response

to counsel’s Anders brief. We have reviewed the record, including the transcripts of the

change of plea hearing held March 1, 2023, and the sentencing hearing held April 17,

2023, and we find no arguably meritorious issues exist. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of the Muskingum County Common Pleas

Court.

By: Hoffman, J. Gwin, P.J. and Baldwin, J. concur